Is It Easier To Turn The Ball Over With A Small-Head Driver?

[EmperorPenguin]

I have about a dozen drivers and I notice that the larger, 460cc heads have a tendency to fade, and the smaller heads are easier to hit the ball straight or even turn over a little.  My most reliable driver for straight shots is a Titleist 983K, and I know that driver is not 460cc.  I remember in the past that Tour players prefer slightly smaller heads.  I don't know if it is cosmetic, or because it is easier for them to turn the ball over if they need to.  Do you guys also notice a tendency to fade with the larger heads?

[Adamjoyce15]

For me I have found the smaller heads a bit more fade biased actually. Key word there being for me of course. Also, in my time around fittings I had always had the smaller heads explained to me as being lower spin and thus tend to be a little more fade biased for that as well (what I was told). Looking forward to seeing what others say on this and how its played for them!

[bodhi555]

I think so - I went for a Driver fitting about a month ago, and tried the SIM, Cobra SZ, G410, TS3 and TS4, and the only one I could turn over reliably was the TS4 - everything else was either straight or moved left to right.

[MattyO1984]

I have never particularly noticed 460cc heads being harder to draw but I would definitely say that I have found lower lofted clubs harder. As my ball flight seems to have gone up over the years, I have lofted down over time - 10.5 down to 8.5 over the past few years (moon balls don’t work on the links of Scotland) and as I have gone down the lofts, I have found it harder to turn it over. It could just be me but as a result, I rarely try to hit anything but a little fade of the tee these days.

[Bunkersarebigcups]

In theory and all other things being equal, a more rearward CG promotes a closed face at impact as the CG is "trying to catch up" with the shaft axis. BUT a smaller head with less MOI might be easier to manipulate, so I guess it depends on wether you want a "draw-biased driver" or a driver that is easy to manipulate from neutral to a draw

[NRJyzr]

38 minutes ago, Bunkersarebigcups said:

In theory and all other things being equal, a more rearward CG promotes a closed face at impact as the CG is "trying to catch up" with the shaft axis. BUT a smaller head with less MOI might be easier to manipulate, so I guess it depends on wether you want a "draw-biased driver" or a driver that is easy to manipulate from neutral to a draw

 

Yes, the more rearward CG tries to align with the hosel in the swing, but a CG farther from the hosel requires more effort to return square.  I don't know how much of each of these two aspects is applied in the swing.  <shrug>

 

A higher clubhead MOI also promotes a straighter flight.  Remember Nick Faldo's comment after playing Eye2 irons.  😉 And, for that matter, the Tour Player response to the SLDR, a fair number of them reporting it too difficult to control.

 

It's not infrequently mentioned on TV that a pro will use a fairway wood when he wishes to move the ball laterally more easily on a tee shot.  Prior to this century's move to huge drivers, most players were taught the 3w was straighter, due to the higher loft.  Now we hear the opposite.  IMHO, it's due to MOI.

 

Being topical and stating the obvious, I say the answer to the OP question is yes, smaller clubs are easier to turn over.  And fade as well, if one wishes.

 

Edited October 12, 2020 by NRJyzr

[Fairway14]

9 hours ago, EmperorPenguin said:

I have about a dozen drivers and I notice that the larger, 460cc heads have a tendency to fade, and the smaller heads are easier to hit the ball straight or even turn over a little.  My most reliable driver for straight shots is a Titleist 983K, and I know that driver is not 460cc.  I remember in the past that Tour players prefer slightly smaller heads.  I don't know if it is cosmetic, or because it is easier for them to turn the ball over if they need to.  Do you guys also notice a tendency to fade with the larger heads?

 

The Titleist 983K is 365 CC size, which is easier to square-at-impact than a 460 CC size driver. But, loft is relevant as well. The lower the loft the more challenging it is to produce a draw shot. 20 years ago the 260CC 975D is 9.5* loft was a very popular driver for all skill levels, from amateur to Tour pro. So, head size and loft work together to form an ideal combination.

[Davidv]

With all the available adjustments with today's 460 drivers a draw should be no problem. It is literally being handed to you.

[bladehunter]

Of course it is.  Couple swings will show you.  

[Red4282]

There is no absolute answer. Some heads can be, some wont, and is also player dependent. 

[MtlJeff]

I would say yes only because i can draw my 3 wood a lot easier than my driver

[RxGolf1]

This year's SIM and Speedzone seem to be fade biased IMO.  It's very difficult for me to work the ball right to left with either driver. 

[waltonsfinest]

Smaller heads typically mean less spin, meaning less forgiving. This “should” result in a more true reaction of the ball in reaction to the drivers face angle. Meaning since the MOI is lower, the head won’t correct itself as much. So if you put a “draw” swing it a “fade” swing on it, it should react more violently than a bigger, more forging driver. The same said with irons-cavity vs. blades. 

[puttingmatt]

Smaller heads are easier to work the ball , fade or draw but, face angle  and swing path have more to do with working the ball.

Neutral club settings should take the  side spin biases out of the ball flight . With practice, a 460cc driver will yield good results with working the ball flight.

[joostin]

Yep, like @Bunkersarebigcups and @NRJyzr said, the farther the head's CG from the shaft axis the bigger that torque and MOI about that axis - more resistance making it potentially harder to turn over.  I think that an individual's sensitivity to that resistance may be a missing factor when trying to figure out feel.  It's a small torque and MOI, but it's something we react to when swinging even if we're not aware of it.

 

I mentioned in another other thread or two that no one measures it, let alone thinks to.  We just know swingweight or MOI lengthwise of the club.  Someone will create a torque or MOI scale for it one day (Mitchell, GolfWorks, Auditor... you reading?!).  Maltby MPF clubhead MOI and C dimensions come close (can probably shift MOI to hosel axis with parallel axis theorem).  Practically we just have anecdotal evidence of how shafts of different torque ratings feel and how different head/shaft combos feel.

 

We know the head CG tries to align with the shaft axis causing toe in, toe droop, increase in dynamic loft, but the resistance to rotate the wrists would be personal to one's own biomechanics.  Similar to how jumbo grips can make it hard for some people to square the face, but some people don't have any problem, and they wonder what's wrong with the others!  So for some (maybe majority?) having a smaller headed driver or a blade iron with the head's CG closer to the shaft axis than a bigger head would be easier to turn over or manipulate.

Edited October 14, 2020 by joostin

[cmatthews77]

I would argue (for me) that it's easier to "turn over" a shorter length club to a longer length club up a point.  It's more of a length and loft than head size to an extent. 

[GBBM]

One quiggle in this is that smaller traditional shaped heads tend to be more open by design because they’re targeted at better players, and also have shorter gravity angles that will reduce dynamic loft and face closure during the impact sequence when compared to deep CG 460 cc drivers. 
 

But yet I think it’s easier to consistently square a smaller headed club. The look just suits my eye and swing. And I think moving so much mass away from the shaft axis like we see in modern drivers looks good in a computer model or a robot test, but can actually make it more difficult to “feel” the club head through impact. 

I have had a theory about this for a lot of years now. There are guys, usually “swingers” that can play well with just about anything. Then there’s the people who for a variety of reasons really see stark contrasts in their ability to strike the ball from club to club. These people tend to be “hitters.” 
 

I played baseball growing up and through college. I didn’t take up golf until 7 years after college. A baseball bat doesn’t bend during the swing, and, as a golf “hitter” my mind tried applying that same “doesn’t bend” idea to golf clubs. It took me longer than I’d like to admit to learn that golf clubs do bend and that was why the head wasn’t where my brain was telling it would be with certain clubs. Particular my ultra forgiving G10 driver. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 

I think that smaller headed drivers with their inherent forward CG (usually with a stout shaft) are more popular with “hitter” types because the head weight isn’t as far from the shaft axis which provides more feel for the face at impact, and thus less reliance on timing. Kinda like knowing where the meat of the baseball bat is in the swing. 
 

If you think about it the driver is the one club where the CG is so far away from the shaft axis and also the one club almost everyone has trouble hitting. Sure it has a longer shaft and less loft, which certainly contribute, but I firmly believe there is something to the head size/CG/shaft axis relationship that makes it hard for a lot of amateurs to hit driver consistently. 

[farris207]

https://Not allowed because of spam.com/2019-driver-center-of-gravity-and-moi-report/

 

If you look through this report you can find which driver heads will have more of a draw/fade bias to them based off the weighting. This can be amplified within the driver that have a movable weight. This be be a helpful starting point if you are looking for a driver that is easier to turn over for you. 

[farris207]

my golf spy . c o m is where the MOI report is. 

[phizzy30]

I naturally hit a draw and there has never been a driver on this planet that I could never draw.  If I hit a fade it's by accident.  I did have a TM R11 Super Deep and that was the only driver where I could play a 10 yard cut just by manipulating my grip but that was the only exception to the rule. 

Edited October 20, 2020 by phizzy30

[Valtiel]

On 10/12/2020 at 5:57 AM, NRJyzr said:

 

Yes, the more rearward CG tries to align with the hosel in the swing, but a CG farther from the hosel requires more effort to return square.  I don't know how much of each of these two aspects is applied in the swing.  <shrug>

 

A higher clubhead MOI also promotes a straighter flight.  Remember Nick Faldo's comment after playing Eye2 irons.  😉 And, for that matter, the Tour Player response to the SLDR, a fair number of them reporting it too difficult to control.

 

It's not infrequently mentioned on TV that a pro will use a fairway wood when he wishes to move the ball laterally more easily on a tee shot.  Prior to this century's move to huge drivers, most players were taught the 3w was straighter, due to the higher loft.  Now we hear the opposite.  IMHO, it's due to MOI.

 

Being topical and stating the obvious, I say the answer to the OP question is yes, smaller clubs are easier to turn over.  And fade as well, if one wishes.

 

With regards to the 3w, I think it is much more about spin than MOI. Today's golf ball obviously spins much less, and in the age of more optimized launch conditions with lower spin off the driver, the 3-wood is simply much safer to turn over given the higher loft and spin. The window between tight draw and duck hook is much smaller with the driver, especially if you are someone with a big positive AoA and very low spin. When you look at the power hitters that like to play a draw, they tend to have a higher average spinning setup for stability. 

[hammergolf]

On 10/11/2020 at 10:39 PM, EmperorPenguin said:

I have about a dozen drivers and I notice that the larger, 460cc heads have a tendency to fade, and the smaller heads are easier to hit the ball straight or even turn over a little.  My most reliable driver for straight shots is a Titleist 983K, and I know that driver is not 460cc.  I remember in the past that Tour players prefer slightly smaller heads.  I don't know if it is cosmetic, or because it is easier for them to turn the ball over if they need to.  Do you guys also notice a tendency to fade with the larger heads?

The 983K was a draw biased driver. The larger heads do tend to lag open slightly but you would be surprised how many tour players have heel weight in their drivers to make it easier to turn over.